Someone earlier defended the self-indulgent tactics of Code Pink by saying "Well at least they're doing something." Ooh is that like how tabloids praise attention-seeking celebrities who show up at a "charity" function wearing an AIDS ribbon as "doing something?" Funny, but I thought it was a good idea to "do something" that's actually designed to get results. But hey, the Code Pink people do get to pat themselves on the back to show how much they care (unlike the plebians who are so much inferior. It's like the activist version of being "holier-than-thou!" Why not, the attitude has worked so well for the Christians after all.)

And speaking of Christians, I read a passage of the Bible once where Jesus was warning some of his followers not to do as the hypocrits do loudly praying and making a big show of it because he said that they already got their reward. Now why did I say that? I'm one of the dumb masses so I can't figure it out. But I'm sure one of the smart people here can interpret.

Also his barber and his chef too. Only we the streets are cleared of these MONSTERS (because, hey you never know when that box of extra cheese and pepperoni might be used for TERROR!) will I feel safe!

By the way, (and I'm sure most of you smarties know this already) but what the driver was found "guilty" of wasn't even the original charge in the first place. Originally it was just the conspiricy charge. Then a law was passed and they addedd that LATER ON. So no, merely being Osama's chaffuer WASN'T illegal until Bush suddenly said it was.

What a high moral level we raise democratic politicians to

Yeah so? Yeah how presuptuous to expect democrats to act better then Republicans. (and to be fair what Edwards did did strike me as a rather "Gingrich" thing to do.) And funny how female politicians (of both parties) ARE capable of living up to the "high moral level" we put them to. THEY never get involved in sex scandals.

I'm going to be honest here and admit that I am rather dispointed in Edwards on a personal level (as I would be in just about ANYONE who cheated, honestly.) First of all, as mentioned above, it does make Edwards seem more like a "typical politician" I was hoping that he'd be a little more then that. Also his excuses disturbed me more then the actual affair. Besides showing him as a big lame-o ("But I didn't LOVE her", "Elizabeth's cancer was in remission" "The baby isn't mine" um...how does he know) one of the big annoyances of politics is the rationalizing of poor decisions. The fact that it wasn't "that big a deal" makes it even sillier when politicians go to such elaborate coverup to hide it (what's happens when a bigger mistake is made down the road, like say, voting to authorize the military to use force in Iraq. Do we get rationalizations and defliction of blame from people who can't fully face up to what they did?) Like that old saying goes, the cover up is worse then the crime.

That being said, politically I support Edwards (or I would, if he was running for anything anymore.) And I agree that the media is going to get all stupid over this story (although to be fair, the only people who have been raising the point, until recently, was the National Enquirer, which is what they do. This story broke in 2007 but the MSM didn't really run with it until now. And even NOW, it's stil not being greeted with breathless "Drudge Siren Alarm" fevor that I'd expected. Luckily Johnny-boy was smart enough to reveal this during the Friday news infodump. And John Mccain has been oddly quiet on this issue, like gee I wonder why, eh?)

God you're still talking about this Glenn? I thought it was settled. Ivins hated sororities. That means he's a SICKO who's responsbible for every evil atrocity ever. Isn't that clear cut enough? Now let's MOVE ON and analyze why Bernie Mac died and Edwards porked some chick like responsible media should! Lord!

I only read the first page before I realzied that this was just generic Beltway cliches and tuned out. Of course, in that 1st page no one pointed out the problem with the question in the first place, which is why does Obama have to "cream" Mccain anyway? (Which is what Edwards did to that Hunter lady. Thank you folks and don't forget to tip your waitress when you leave.) If Barack Obama wins, isn't that enough? I know Republicans with their sociopathic s&m tendancies think politics is all about humiliating their opponent (as oppose to, say showing why your canidate is the best for the job) but Salon of all places shouldn't keep flagging up this non-issue (because it's not like "inability to 'crush' democratic opponent ever stopped Bush's ascention to power or anything.)

I mean, well that olympic sprinter came in 1st, but not by enough so it doesn't "count." What the Hell kind of talking point is THAT?

Who gives a fuck what Jabba the Campaign Consultant thinks? He worked for a losing campaign. In fact he's usually pointed out as one of the key reason's Hillary lost. Can we please talk to people who know what they're actually talking about rather then some decitful, incompetent fat-ass. Geez!